Search for: "Strong v. Strong"
Results 5221 - 5240
of 19,632
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 May 2011, 5:27 pm
Daniel RR v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 4:09 am
Tugendhat J refused to make such a determination (Cairns v Modi [2010] EWHC 2859 (QB)). [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 3:42 pm
However, “[v]oluntary accommodations regarding matrimonial differences are highly desirable and make a major contribution to the fulfillment of ‘the strong public policy favoring stability of arrangements. [read post]
26 Mar 2023, 5:00 pm
Coinbase, Inc. v. [read post]
24 May 2023, 4:16 pm
We apply a “strong presumption” in favor of enforcing mandatory forum-selection clauses. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 8:50 am
Granger & Sons v. [read post]
27 Feb 2010, 7:46 am
” Furthermore the European Court has recognised in B v United Kingdom; P v United Kingdom that the Article 6 requirement to hold a public hearing was subject to exceptions [2001] 2 FLR 261 . [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 4:51 am
Florence v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 7:02 am
In GenOn Mid-Atlantic v. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 9:55 am
Pa. 2014). [6] Id. at 534-35. [7] FTC v. [read post]
2 May 2016, 2:13 pm
” State v. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 1:45 am
This was the issue before the Supreme Court in Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd [2012] UKSC 1. [read post]
19 Dec 2022, 5:51 am
“Whether a proffered excuse is reasonable is a sui generis determination to be made by the court based on all relevant factors, including the extent of the delay, whether there has been prejudice to the opposing party, whether there has been willfulness, and the strong public policy in favor of resolving cases on the merits” (Nowakowski v Stages, 179 AD3d 822, 823 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Jinwu Yu v Hong Qin Jiang, 205 AD3d 1012, 1013). [read post]
27 Jan 2023, 4:32 am
“Whether a proffered excuse is reasonable is a sui generis determination to be made by the court based on all relevant factors, including the extent of the delay, whether there has been prejudice to the opposing party, whether there has been willfulness, and the strong public policy in favor of resolving cases on the merits” (Nowakowski v Stages, 179 AD3d 822, 823 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Jinwu Yu v Hong Qin Jiang, 205 AD3d 1012, 1013). [read post]
7 Jul 2020, 3:40 am
The court also decided in Barr v. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 6:37 pm
Twombly and Ashcroft v. [read post]
16 Feb 2017, 9:47 am
In Eli Lilly & Co. v. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 6:37 pm
Twombly and Ashcroft v. [read post]
22 May 2008, 4:37 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Apr 2008, 4:20 am
United States v. [read post]
